CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.